Posts tagged with DNG
It’s amazing how often some Lightroom users still assert that a disadvantage of the DNG file format is that any time the metadata changes in the DNG file, you have to backup the whole DNG file again (and again). This isn’t a disadvantage of DNG – it’s a failure to re-assess and think through your backup strategy.
So as it’s now pantomime season, a deep intake of breath please, and after me – OH NO YOU DON’T!
To explain, I don’t dismiss the need to back up your work. Backup is good, of course, but you have to think it through and . . .
While I’m a long-time fan of DNG and welcome its latest developments, you’ve got to be very cautious about saving pictures with the new lossy option. The workflow benefits aren’t enough to outweigh the very significant risks.
Barry Pearson writes about Seven years of writing about Digital Negative Format and other tales of the life and advantages of the DNG format:
When Adobe launched DNG on 27 September 2004, it was obvious to me that this was addressing a significant need. I knew from my career in helping to develop complicated multi-vendor computing systems that it is very important to structure a system into components linked by documented common interfaces.
I spent about 2 weeks examining the available documentation about DNG, including the specification, before concluding that it was a credible proposal. On 10 October 2004 I began to use DNG for all my . . .
If you save metadata back to a DNG, doesn’t it mean that every time a change is made the whole large file needs to be backed up?
Not really. It obviously makes no sense to keep backing up big DNG files after every change, but that’s a straw man argument against the format. Instead you simply backup the DNGs upon their creation, and routinely backup your catalogue. If you were to hit a catastrophe, you can reconstruct the exact state of your work by restoring these virgin DNGs and your catalogue. Sidecars don’t contain all your Lightroom work.